newbie needs offroad faq/primer/recommendations

I admit to never driving anything more than my Subaru Outback which I
traded in on a Toyota. I need a 4WD with good tires and clearance to
drive dirt/rock poor roads and in snow, primarily for photographic
expeditions into the wilderness....

Been looking at Jeeps, Toyota pickups, attracted to the Wrangler, but
the Cherokee has lots of room to pack around sound and lighting gear
which would be a plus, and a pickup would be handier for the
occasional 4x8 plywood or bed-moving project. Wouldn't mind being
able to sleep in vehicle if early sunrise shoot far off the beaten
path required.

The main thing though is getting off the beaten path.... and getting
back!! What's important?? Clearance??, tire size??, suspension
structure?? extra low gears?? What are the choices, advantages,
etc...

thanks in advance for pointers!
Peter

Are you looking used or new?

Might also help to point out roughly what geographic area you'd be
heading into for photography and just how remote. In some areas you'd
want a lifted wrangler with big tires, lockers, heavy duty axles, tow
straps AND someone in another wrangler to help you home.

In some areas, you could actually get there in a Volvo with pretty much
the same chance of getting home.

The Cherokee is a really good compromise if you are looking used. Lots
of space, reasonably good off road capability, but tends to be as pricey
or just slightly pricier than the Grand Cherokee used... the Grand can
also go offroad [and more important--get back] but also makes a good
highway cruiser.

recommends would kinda depend on your budget.

New, take a look at the 4 door wrangler unlimiteds. Or the new liberty,
or the new wrangler, or if you are after really fast subjects, the grand
cherokee srt8.

When I was looking some time ago, the used Toyota 4runners were just way
more expensive than a Ford Explorer, Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, etc. and
in my non humble opinion, not worth the difference.

bohemian proclaimed:
> I admit to never driving anything more than my Subaru Outback which I
> traded in on a Toyota. I need a 4WD with good tires and clearance to
> drive dirt/rock poor roads and in snow, primarily for photographic
> expeditions into the wilderness....
>
> Been looking at Jeeps, Toyota pickups, attracted to the Wrangler, but
> the Cherokee has lots of room to pack around sound and lighting gear
> which would be a plus, and a pickup would be handier for the
> occasional 4x8 plywood or bed-moving project. Wouldn't mind being
> able to sleep in vehicle if early sunrise shoot far off the beaten
> path required.
>
> The main thing though is getting off the beaten path.... and getting
> back!! What's important?? Clearance??, tire size??, suspension
> structure?? extra low gears?? What are the choices, advantages,
> etc...

It is definitely used.... I am hoping to spend somewhere between 5
and 10 K..... northern california, Shasta, Trinity, Siskiyou, and
Lassen counties... lots of unimproved roads, snow in the winter, but
not wanting to climb a 45 degree slope strewn with 2 foot boulders

Thanks!!


On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:14:40 -0600, Lon >
wrote:

>Are you looking used or new?
>
>Might also help to point out roughly what geographic area you'd be
>heading into for photography and just how remote. In some areas you'd
>want a lifted wrangler with big tires, lockers, heavy duty axles, tow
>straps AND someone in another wrangler to help you home.
>
>In some areas, you could actually get there in a Volvo with pretty much
>the same chance of getting home.
>
>The Cherokee is a really good compromise if you are looking used. Lots
>of space, reasonably good off road capability, but tends to be as pricey
>or just slightly pricier than the Grand Cherokee used... the Grand can
>also go offroad [and more important--get back] but also makes a good
>highway cruiser.
>
>recommends would kinda depend on your budget.
>
>New, take a look at the 4 door wrangler unlimiteds. Or the new liberty,
>or the new wrangler, or if you are after really fast subjects, the grand
>cherokee srt8.
>
>When I was looking some time ago, the used Toyota 4runners were just way
>more expensive than a Ford Explorer, Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, etc. and
>in my non humble opinion, not worth the difference.
>
>bohemian proclaimed:
>> I admit to never driving anything more than my Subaru Outback which I
>> traded in on a Toyota. I need a 4WD with good tires and clearance to
>> drive dirt/rock poor roads and in snow, primarily for photographic
>> expeditions into the wilderness....
>>
>> Been looking at Jeeps, Toyota pickups, attracted to the Wrangler, but
>> the Cherokee has lots of room to pack around sound and lighting gear
>> which would be a plus, and a pickup would be handier for the
>> occasional 4x8 plywood or bed-moving project. Wouldn't mind being
>> able to sleep in vehicle if early sunrise shoot far off the beaten
>> path required.
>>
>> The main thing though is getting off the beaten path.... and getting
>> back!! What's important?? Clearance??, tire size??, suspension
>> structure?? extra low gears?? What are the choices, advantages,
>> etc...

On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:14:40 -0600, Lon >
wrote:

>Are you looking used or new?
>
>Might also help to point out roughly what geographic area you'd be
>heading into for photography and just how remote. In some areas you'd
>want a lifted wrangler with big tires, lockers, heavy duty axles, tow
>straps AND someone in another wrangler to help you home.

This is were the brain is supposed to say, this is not passible and
time to find another route or walk, not charge ahead and hope for a
tug out.

>
>In some areas, you could actually get there in a Volvo with pretty much
>the same chance of getting home.

A Subaru could get places a Volvo could only dream off.

>
>The Cherokee is a really good compromise if you are looking used. Lots
>of space, reasonably good off road capability, but tends to be as pricey
>or just slightly pricier than the Grand Cherokee used... the Grand can
>also go offroad [and more important--get back] but also makes a good
>highway cruiser.

Yes it is a good compromise. I would stay way from grand if you plan
to run trails. The grand weights more and is thirstier for fuel which
can limit trips off beaten path. Also a V8 grand uses about as much
fuel or more than a much biiger Tahoe or the like. A 2001 or earlier
basic Cherokee is a pretty versital vehcile and a fairly tough cookie
too.

>
>recommends would kinda depend on your budget.
>
>New, take a look at the 4 door wrangler unlimiteds. Or the new liberty,
>or the new wrangler, or if you are after really fast subjects, the grand
>cherokee srt8.

A 4 door wangker is not a Jeep anymore and if you are going for that
size there is a lot of other vehcile with greater comfort and same of
better fuel range. Oh, I really like the part about a V8 grand to
catch your subject, get real!

>
>When I was looking some time ago, the used Toyota 4runners were just way
>more expensive than a Ford Explorer, Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, etc. and
>in my non humble opinion, not worth the difference.
>


I do agree that a 4 Runner is more expensive but the quality and
proven durabilty of Toyota brand far exceeds the others.(you get what
you pay for) Being that he has driven Subarus the 4 Runner is a better
pupgrade path because it is more like a bigger Subaru in design and
engineering concept that a Grand or Cherokee. You could not give me a
Explorer, especailly a per 2003 model that likes to roll with a rear
tire blow out. As for grand stated earlier for it fuel usage there are
other more roomy options. Anyway you cut it a Grand is a small 4x4
that they stuffed a V8 in in some of them. If you want a V8 power 4x4,
get one that was born designed for one, not added/shoe horned inas a
after thought.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com

Thanks, snoman! I am looking for a but better than the outback iin
terms of clearance - I agree not to be interested in a Grand... I just
figured the cherokee, but of course if a toyota turnd up at a
reasonable price, I'd not shy away from that.... No, I am not chasing
anything faster than a sunset!

Nobody has any comments about transmission or suspension styles that
are out there... some to be sought after, some to be avoided?? I
don't feel a need to "stick with" a car based product, a truck-based
produce would seem fine...

see below and thanks again


On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 11:38:07 -0400, SnoMan > wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:14:40 -0600, Lon >
>wrote:
>
>>Are you looking used or new?
>>
>>Might also help to point out roughly what geographic area you'd be
>>heading into for photography and just how remote. In some areas you'd
>>want a lifted wrangler with big tires, lockers, heavy duty axles, tow
>>straps AND someone in another wrangler to help you home.
>
>This is were the brain is supposed to say, this is not passible and
>time to find another route or walk, not charge ahead and hope for a
>tug out.
>
and of course, there's always, "the picture isn't worth it!"

>>
>>In some areas, you could actually get there in a Volvo with pretty much
>>the same chance of getting home.
>
>A Subaru could get places a Volvo could only dream off.
>
I have even pulled an SUV out of the snow with my outback

>>
>>The Cherokee is a really good compromise if you are looking used. Lots
>>of space, reasonably good off road capability, but tends to be as pricey
>>or just slightly pricier than the Grand Cherokee used... the Grand can
>>also go offroad [and more important--get back] but also makes a good
>>highway cruiser.
>
>Yes it is a good compromise. I would stay way from grand if you plan
>to run trails. The grand weights more and is thirstier for fuel which
>can limit trips off beaten path. Also a V8 grand uses about as much
>fuel or more than a much biiger Tahoe or the like. A 2001 or earlier
>basic Cherokee is a pretty versital vehcile and a fairly tough cookie
>too.
>
I like the idea of a vintage 2000 Cherokee... are they all 4WD, all
switchable btwn 2 and 4, all have the same suspensions?? I was told
the 4.0 L straight 6 was a good long-lasting engine... that true?? is
the smaller 2.5 L engine to be avoided??

>>
>>recommends would kinda depend on your budget.
>>
>>New, take a look at the 4 door wrangler unlimiteds. Or the new liberty,
>>or the new wrangler, or if you are after really fast subjects, the grand
>>cherokee srt8.
>
>A 4 door wangker is not a Jeep anymore and if you are going for that
>size there is a lot of other vehcile with greater comfort and same of
>better fuel range. Oh, I really like the part about a V8 grand to
>catch your subject, get real!
>
>>
>>When I was looking some time ago, the used Toyota 4runners were just way
>>more expensive than a Ford Explorer, Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, etc. and
>>in my non humble opinion, not worth the difference.
>>
>
>
>I do agree that a 4 Runner is more expensive but the quality and
>proven durabilty of Toyota brand far exceeds the others.(you get what
>you pay for) Being that he has driven Subarus the 4 Runner is a better
>pupgrade path because it is more like a bigger Subaru in design and
>engineering concept that a Grand or Cherokee. You could not give me a
>Explorer, especailly a per 2003 model that likes to roll with a rear
>tire blow out. As for grand stated earlier for it fuel usage there are
>other more roomy options. Anyway you cut it a Grand is a small 4x4
>that they stuffed a V8 in in some of them. If you want a V8 power 4x4,
>get one that was born designed for one, not added/shoe horned inas a
>after thought.
>-----------------
>TheSnoMan.com

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:41:44 GMT, bohemian >
wrote:

>Thanks, snoman! I am looking for a but better than the outback iin
>terms of clearance - I agree not to be interested in a Grand... I just
>figured the cherokee, but of course if a toyota turnd up at a
>reasonable price, I'd not shy away from that.... No, I am not chasing
>anything faster than a sunset!
>
>Nobody has any comments about transmission or suspension styles that
>are out there... some to be sought after, some to be avoided?? I
>don't feel a need to "stick with" a car based product, a truck-based
>produce would seem fine...


If you want to get extreme you could find a lod clean 87 to 91 4x4
Suburban. As long as they as fairly firm ground under them they are
tanks. I still have a 89 that I bought new and it has seen lower than
minus 40 and more than 105 above and it has never failed me. We used
it as a family travel/vaction vehcile and it has made more than a
dozen trips across country and rockies without ever needing repair on
these trips. Today it has over 180K on it and sits some times for
weeks until I need to make a non local trip with it at a moments
notice. Burbs have gobs or room and those models have solid axles and
sturdy frame and could be had with a 40 gallon fuel tank too (mine
does) and with it you can get a lot of time in back country before
needing to return for fuel. This was a nice feature when exploring
back road of CO, WY and MT. In those areas you can be 50 to 75 miles
from a fuel stop sometimes.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com

You are wide open for Grand Cherokee or Cherokee.

The leather trim and auto temp control of the early ZJ series Grand
Cherokees is at the lower end of your range. Opinions differ on I-6 or
V8 with either one capable of speeding tickets. The upper end will get
you a WJ series Grand, which kinda looks like a ZJ someone overinflated,
but it is arguably a tad more civilized.

The Cherokee is also right in that range, where if you highway much the
Grand Cherokee is a bit easier on the bohurkus and the Grand is more
aerodynamic for possibly a bit better mileage.

The Grand will go amazing places...so will the Cherokee.

There is full time 4wd that works reasonably well on the Grand if you
have good tires and know how to drive in snow, there is the part time
4wd where you don't want to use it on non-slick surfaces.

Some of the non-Jeep dealers are more likely to have better prices, for
some reason the Jeep dealers seem just a tad too much in love with their
used ones.

Get a good mechanical inspection at either a dealer or a jeep specialty
shop before you buy.

If you do go for the Grand, be aware that auto temp control unit can
cost about as much as a new transmission should it ever take the day
off. The Cherokee has a bit more simplicity as a virtue...


bohemian proclaimed:
> It is definitely used.... I am hoping to spend somewhere between 5
> and 10 K..... northern california, Shasta, Trinity, Siskiyou, and
> Lassen counties... lots of unimproved roads, snow in the winter, but
> not wanting to climb a 45 degree slope strewn with 2 foot boulders
>
> Thanks!!
>
>
> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:14:40 -0600, Lon >
> wrote:
>
>> Are you looking used or new?
>>
>> Might also help to point out roughly what geographic area you'd be
>> heading into for photography and just how remote. In some areas you'd
>> want a lifted wrangler with big tires, lockers, heavy duty axles, tow
>> straps AND someone in another wrangler to help you home.
>>
>> In some areas, you could actually get there in a Volvo with pretty much
>> the same chance of getting home.
>>
>> The Cherokee is a really good compromise if you are looking used. Lots
>> of space, reasonably good off road capability, but tends to be as pricey
>> or just slightly pricier than the Grand Cherokee used... the Grand can
>> also go offroad [and more important--get back] but also makes a good
>> highway cruiser.
>>
>> recommends would kinda depend on your budget.
>>
>> New, take a look at the 4 door wrangler unlimiteds. Or the new liberty,
>> or the new wrangler, or if you are after really fast subjects, the grand
>> cherokee srt8.
>>
>> When I was looking some time ago, the used Toyota 4runners were just way
>> more expensive than a Ford Explorer, Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, etc. and
>> in my non humble opinion, not worth the difference.
>>
>> bohemian proclaimed:
>>> I admit to never driving anything more than my Subaru Outback which I
>>> traded in on a Toyota. I need a 4WD with good tires and clearance to
>>> drive dirt/rock poor roads and in snow, primarily for photographic
>>> expeditions into the wilderness....
>>>
>>> Been looking at Jeeps, Toyota pickups, attracted to the Wrangler, but
>>> the Cherokee has lots of room to pack around sound and lighting gear
>>> which would be a plus, and a pickup would be handier for the
>>> occasional 4x8 plywood or bed-moving project. Wouldn't mind being
>>> able to sleep in vehicle if early sunrise shoot far off the beaten
>>> path required.
>>>
>>> The main thing though is getting off the beaten path.... and getting
>>> back!! What's important?? Clearance??, tire size??, suspension
>>> structure?? extra low gears?? What are the choices, advantages,
>>> etc...
>

Both the Cherokee and the Grand are non-truck based, which is why both
are pretty light...before you assume on someone elses word about the
Grand, check the weight, then park a ZJ next to a Honda Accord and see
how much longer the Accord is.

The 4 speed auto in the cherokee series works reasonably well, you can
cruise at 65 just over 2k rpm. The I-6 gets a tad noisy over 3500 in
stock form compared to the 318 v8. The full time versus part time 4wd
kinda depends on whether you like having full time on for thick slush
and typical Sierra highways and secondary roads or want max traction
[part time variety] for worse conditions. I never really had any
trouble with just the full time variety over Donner and down around Ca
88 at any time they were open to 4wd vehicles--and that with just
Michelin M+S rather than really hard core tires.

Another candidate you might want to keep an eye for is the Isuzu trooper
or the Mitsu Montero Sport. The Mitsu Montero Sport is more trucklike
than the Cherokee/Grand, but it gets ya there and back and has pretty
capable off road. Never drove a Trooper in bad terrain so dunno how
they work out.

The Explorers also work, but their V6 just doesn't seem to have as much
beans as the I-6 in the Cherokees and I personally just don't like their
low range or 4wd shifting style although they handle the Sierras and the
Nevada eastern slopes and desert quite nicely once you get the !!@$
things shifted. Avoid the 2door Explorers in my opinion, a waste of
sheet metal. You might disagree.



bohemian proclaimed:
> Thanks, snoman! I am looking for a but better than the outback iin
> terms of clearance - I agree not to be interested in a Grand... I just
> figured the cherokee, but of course if a toyota turnd up at a
> reasonable price, I'd not shy away from that.... No, I am not chasing
> anything faster than a sunset!
>
> Nobody has any comments about transmission or suspension styles that
> are out there... some to be sought after, some to be avoided?? I
> don't feel a need to "stick with" a car based product, a truck-based
> produce would seem fine...
>
> see below and thanks again
>
>
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 11:38:07 -0400, SnoMan > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:14:40 -0600, Lon >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Are you looking used or new?
>>>
>>> Might also help to point out roughly what geographic area you'd be
>>> heading into for photography and just how remote. In some areas you'd
>>> want a lifted wrangler with big tires, lockers, heavy duty axles, tow
>>> straps AND someone in another wrangler to help you home.
>> This is were the brain is supposed to say, this is not passible and
>> time to find another route or walk, not charge ahead and hope for a
>> tug out.
>>
> and of course, there's always, "the picture isn't worth it!"
>
>>> In some areas, you could actually get there in a Volvo with pretty much
>>> the same chance of getting home.
>> A Subaru could get places a Volvo could only dream off.
>>
> I have even pulled an SUV out of the snow with my outback
>
>>> The Cherokee is a really good compromise if you are looking used. Lots
>>> of space, reasonably good off road capability, but tends to be as pricey
>>> or just slightly pricier than the Grand Cherokee used... the Grand can
>>> also go offroad [and more important--get back] but also makes a good
>>> highway cruiser.
>> Yes it is a good compromise. I would stay way from grand if you plan
>> to run trails. The grand weights more and is thirstier for fuel which
>> can limit trips off beaten path. Also a V8 grand uses about as much
>> fuel or more than a much biiger Tahoe or the like. A 2001 or earlier
>> basic Cherokee is a pretty versital vehcile and a fairly tough cookie
>> too.
>>
> I like the idea of a vintage 2000 Cherokee... are they all 4WD, all
> switchable btwn 2 and 4, all have the same suspensions?? I was told
> the 4.0 L straight 6 was a good long-lasting engine... that true?? is
> the smaller 2.5 L engine to be avoided??
>
>>> recommends would kinda depend on your budget.
>>>
>>> New, take a look at the 4 door wrangler unlimiteds. Or the new liberty,
>>> or the new wrangler, or if you are after really fast subjects, the grand
>>> cherokee srt8.
>> A 4 door wangker is not a Jeep anymore and if you are going for that
>> size there is a lot of other vehcile with greater comfort and same of
>> better fuel range. Oh, I really like the part about a V8 grand to
>> catch your subject, get real!
>>
>>> When I was looking some time ago, the used Toyota 4runners were just way
>>> more expensive than a Ford Explorer, Grand Cherokee, Cherokee, etc. and
>>> in my non humble opinion, not worth the difference.
>>>
>>
>> I do agree that a 4 Runner is more expensive but the quality and
>> proven durabilty of Toyota brand far exceeds the others.(you get what
>> you pay for) Being that he has driven Subarus the 4 Runner is a better
>> pupgrade path because it is more like a bigger Subaru in design and
>> engineering concept that a Grand or Cherokee. You could not give me a
>> Explorer, especailly a per 2003 model that likes to roll with a rear
>> tire blow out. As for grand stated earlier for it fuel usage there are
>> other more roomy options. Anyway you cut it a Grand is a small 4x4
>> that they stuffed a V8 in in some of them. If you want a V8 power 4x4,
>> get one that was born designed for one, not added/shoe horned inas a
>> after thought.
>> -----------------
>> TheSnoMan.com
>

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:59:39 -0600, Lon >
wrote:

>The Cherokee has a bit more simplicity as a virtue...


Chysler made a big mistake with the dropped that vehicle, they should
have kept it in its a basic stripped or entry leave form.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com

SnoMan proclaimed:
> On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 18:59:39 -0600, Lon >
> wrote:
>
>> The Cherokee has a bit more simplicity as a virtue...
>
>
> Chysler made a big mistake with the dropped that vehicle, they should
> have kept it in its a basic stripped or entry leave form.

Yeah, and if they needed a p*ssywagon, they could have filled that slot
with something else and made the Liberty a utility vehicle. The new
Liberty doesn't look that bad, but the doggone thing is almost a Grand
Cherokee by the time the typical dealer gets done with it. Expect the
Nissan XTerra to head upmarket as well soon, taking another true utility
vehicle with passenger space off the market. And don't get me started
on the new land rover with no low range--thanks a lot Ford!!.